View the h-hre Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in h-hre's August 2005 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in h-hre's August 2005 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the h-hre home page.
[Here's a link to Peter Wilson's comments on the nature of the HRE for those who missed it: http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-HRE&month=0508&week=a&msg=FUrxNXwoBIvTsLykkP3ddA&user=&pw= --Eds.] Peter Wilson raises some significant points in his contribution to the discussion on the nature of the HRE. His initial point is well taken when he suggests that the editors’ question risks raising other questions, though I believe that may have been their desire in the first place. It certainly raised several questions for me. In teaching Early Modern Europe I have encountered problems not only in defining the HRE but also in trying to talk about it with students. I often find myself saying that we'll just call it Germany, though I'm never satisfied with doing that. And this brings me to Prof. Wilson's interesting discussion of the “German question.” As I read that part of the discussion, my thought was that the modern focus on the “German question” may be part of the problem in itself. If we discuss it in those terms, then what becomes of the minority groups within the Empire -- the Swiss, the Czechs, the French, the Jews, the Italians? How do we simplify and make approachable for our students such a difficult concept as the HRE without doing a major disservice to those other elements within the HRE? How do we talk about the HRE without looking ahead to the 19th century? How do we instead think about the empire on its own terms throughout its history? How does the nature of the HRE change over time? I would appreciate hearing from some HRE specialists about how they address such problems. Janet McFall Jmcfall@earthlink.net
|